Office of Homeland Security facing daunting challenges.

• Author: Roberts, Steven E.
• Position: Commentary

The White House Office of Homeland Security has been criticized in recent months for being "just another government bureaucracy," inflexible and lacking innovation.

But that is not the case. The Office of Homeland Security may be a "bureaucracy" in the strictest sense, but it is quite atypical.

One classic problem in government is resistance to change--the inability to recognize new circumstances and to react. Under the leadership of Tom Ridge, however, the OHS has shown openness to novel approaches, as it attempts to develop a strategy for homeland security.

But there are many questions that have yet to be answered.

For example, how does one best organize and coordinate the various agencies that play a role in homeland defense? What about state and local government? How can the private sector help? Will Ridge have meaningful executive decision-making authority? Or will his office do little more than issue hollow policy recommendations? There are also a host of technical and logistical questions regarding authority, coordination, cooperation, differentiation and implementation, among others.

Ridge must have the support of the president and the authority to make decisions on his behalf--as well as the budget and staff to back it up. And he does. Ridge's current staff, of about 20, will increase to 100 in the near future. The OHS currently has a $38 million budget.

Many federal agencies have a role in counter-terrorism. From the Department of Defense and the CIA to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Energy, coordinating and organizing these agencies--and their distinct bureaucratic methodologies--is a challenge. Establishing an agency's domestic security role without threatening turf, power and budgets may seem insurmountable. The fact that the number of federal entities considered to have a part in counter-terrorism remains vague reflects the essence of this challenge.

Some argue that 40 federal agencies deserve a seat at the domestic security/counter-terrorism table. Others say the number is 46. Oddly, if Ridge had only 46 agencies to coordinate, his task might be easy. In reality, however, the number of entities involved in homeland security is far greater. State and local government emergency agencies, as well as scores of private sector counterparts, increase the roster.

The FBI and the CIA both play important counter-terrorism roles. But how each agency will complement the other under this new rubric is not dear. Should the CIA focus on intelligence and the FBI on enforcement? This dilemma is further complicated by a new slate of legislation that extends law enforcement powers into uncharted areas. The ability to use "roving wiretaps" without additional court orders is one example.

Further, Ridge must foster cooperation. With the CIA and the FBI, this can be difficult. Historically, the CIA and the FBI have been at odds over information...